SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
(Image: ACLU/with overlay)
Shocked by the "towering cowardice" of the Washington Post's Sunday editorial calling for Edward Snowden to be prosecuted, journalist Glenn Greenwald led the charge against the prominent newspaper for achieving what he described as an "ignoble feat" in American history: being "the first-ever paper to explicitly editorialize for the criminal prosecution of its own paper's source - one on whose back the paper won and eagerly accepted a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service."
Published just two days after Oliver Stone's biopic on the NSA whistleblower, 'Snowden,' premiered in U.S. theaters and following the launch of a national campaign by human rights groups and privacy advocates calling for him to be pardoned, the timing of the WaPo editorial--simply titled "No pardon for Edward Snowden"--emerged as an unexpected (and unwelcome) salvo from a paper whose news editors and journalists played a central and early role in reporting on the information provided.
Greenwald, who along with the Washington Post's Barton Gellman and filmmaker Laura Poitras, was among the first journalists to engage with Snowden and report on key NSA mass spying programs previously kept secret from the U.S. and global public, responded to the editorial in scathing fashion. According to Greenwald:
what makes today's Washington Post editorial so remarkable, such a tour de force, is that the editors are literally calling for the criminal prosecution of one of the most important sources in their own newspaper's history. Having basked in the glory of awards and accolades, and benefitted from untold millions of clicks, the editorial page editors of the Post now want to see the source who enabled all of that be put in an American cage and branded a felon. That is warped beyond anything that can be described.
On Twitter, Snowden chimed in on his own behalf:
\u201cTo defend NSA from critics, @WashingtonPost attacks the story they broke. Which won the Pulitzer for Public Service. https://t.co/S4T2Aj0mEv\u201d— Edward Snowden (@Edward Snowden) 1474215403
Last week, various groups launched the #PardonSnowden campaign which include a petition for people who want to add their support for the call.
"Snowden's actions, and the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting that followed," the petition reads, "set in motion the most important debate about government surveillance in decades, and brought about reforms that continue to benefit our security and democracy."
That argument, however, appears inadequate for the Washington Post editorial board, which argued that Snowden's "revelations about the agency's international operations disrupted lawful intelligence-gathering, causing possibly 'tremendous damage' to national security, according to a unanimous, bipartisan report by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. What higher cause did that serve?"
In addition to Greenwald's detailed take-down of the Post's argument, critics of the newspaper were unsparing on social media:
\u201c@RayJoha2 Was that also WAPO's thinking when it published leaked material from Snowden and made money from those stories?\u201d— justRay.eth \ud83c\udff4\u200d\u2620\ufe0f (@justRay.eth \ud83c\udff4\u200d\u2620\ufe0f) 1474205832
\u201cWould love to be a fly on the wall when @PostBaron and @bartongellman discuss this inept attack on their work. https://t.co/6w73wicaWt\u201d— Ben Wizner (@Ben Wizner) 1474206072
\u201c@micahflee WaPo published, @Snowden didn't. He was clear that journalists, not him, qualified to filter docs for public interest vs. nat sec\u201d— Kyle Rankin (@Kyle Rankin) 1474215362
\u201cthe WaPo now wants their source (Snowden) to be jailed? This is so FUBAR. #NeverHillaryOrTrump https://t.co/5qQi0G2nFK\u201d— Iconoclast (@Iconoclast) 1474217592
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Shocked by the "towering cowardice" of the Washington Post's Sunday editorial calling for Edward Snowden to be prosecuted, journalist Glenn Greenwald led the charge against the prominent newspaper for achieving what he described as an "ignoble feat" in American history: being "the first-ever paper to explicitly editorialize for the criminal prosecution of its own paper's source - one on whose back the paper won and eagerly accepted a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service."
Published just two days after Oliver Stone's biopic on the NSA whistleblower, 'Snowden,' premiered in U.S. theaters and following the launch of a national campaign by human rights groups and privacy advocates calling for him to be pardoned, the timing of the WaPo editorial--simply titled "No pardon for Edward Snowden"--emerged as an unexpected (and unwelcome) salvo from a paper whose news editors and journalists played a central and early role in reporting on the information provided.
Greenwald, who along with the Washington Post's Barton Gellman and filmmaker Laura Poitras, was among the first journalists to engage with Snowden and report on key NSA mass spying programs previously kept secret from the U.S. and global public, responded to the editorial in scathing fashion. According to Greenwald:
what makes today's Washington Post editorial so remarkable, such a tour de force, is that the editors are literally calling for the criminal prosecution of one of the most important sources in their own newspaper's history. Having basked in the glory of awards and accolades, and benefitted from untold millions of clicks, the editorial page editors of the Post now want to see the source who enabled all of that be put in an American cage and branded a felon. That is warped beyond anything that can be described.
On Twitter, Snowden chimed in on his own behalf:
\u201cTo defend NSA from critics, @WashingtonPost attacks the story they broke. Which won the Pulitzer for Public Service. https://t.co/S4T2Aj0mEv\u201d— Edward Snowden (@Edward Snowden) 1474215403
Last week, various groups launched the #PardonSnowden campaign which include a petition for people who want to add their support for the call.
"Snowden's actions, and the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting that followed," the petition reads, "set in motion the most important debate about government surveillance in decades, and brought about reforms that continue to benefit our security and democracy."
That argument, however, appears inadequate for the Washington Post editorial board, which argued that Snowden's "revelations about the agency's international operations disrupted lawful intelligence-gathering, causing possibly 'tremendous damage' to national security, according to a unanimous, bipartisan report by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. What higher cause did that serve?"
In addition to Greenwald's detailed take-down of the Post's argument, critics of the newspaper were unsparing on social media:
\u201c@RayJoha2 Was that also WAPO's thinking when it published leaked material from Snowden and made money from those stories?\u201d— justRay.eth \ud83c\udff4\u200d\u2620\ufe0f (@justRay.eth \ud83c\udff4\u200d\u2620\ufe0f) 1474205832
\u201cWould love to be a fly on the wall when @PostBaron and @bartongellman discuss this inept attack on their work. https://t.co/6w73wicaWt\u201d— Ben Wizner (@Ben Wizner) 1474206072
\u201c@micahflee WaPo published, @Snowden didn't. He was clear that journalists, not him, qualified to filter docs for public interest vs. nat sec\u201d— Kyle Rankin (@Kyle Rankin) 1474215362
\u201cthe WaPo now wants their source (Snowden) to be jailed? This is so FUBAR. #NeverHillaryOrTrump https://t.co/5qQi0G2nFK\u201d— Iconoclast (@Iconoclast) 1474217592
Shocked by the "towering cowardice" of the Washington Post's Sunday editorial calling for Edward Snowden to be prosecuted, journalist Glenn Greenwald led the charge against the prominent newspaper for achieving what he described as an "ignoble feat" in American history: being "the first-ever paper to explicitly editorialize for the criminal prosecution of its own paper's source - one on whose back the paper won and eagerly accepted a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service."
Published just two days after Oliver Stone's biopic on the NSA whistleblower, 'Snowden,' premiered in U.S. theaters and following the launch of a national campaign by human rights groups and privacy advocates calling for him to be pardoned, the timing of the WaPo editorial--simply titled "No pardon for Edward Snowden"--emerged as an unexpected (and unwelcome) salvo from a paper whose news editors and journalists played a central and early role in reporting on the information provided.
Greenwald, who along with the Washington Post's Barton Gellman and filmmaker Laura Poitras, was among the first journalists to engage with Snowden and report on key NSA mass spying programs previously kept secret from the U.S. and global public, responded to the editorial in scathing fashion. According to Greenwald:
what makes today's Washington Post editorial so remarkable, such a tour de force, is that the editors are literally calling for the criminal prosecution of one of the most important sources in their own newspaper's history. Having basked in the glory of awards and accolades, and benefitted from untold millions of clicks, the editorial page editors of the Post now want to see the source who enabled all of that be put in an American cage and branded a felon. That is warped beyond anything that can be described.
On Twitter, Snowden chimed in on his own behalf:
\u201cTo defend NSA from critics, @WashingtonPost attacks the story they broke. Which won the Pulitzer for Public Service. https://t.co/S4T2Aj0mEv\u201d— Edward Snowden (@Edward Snowden) 1474215403
Last week, various groups launched the #PardonSnowden campaign which include a petition for people who want to add their support for the call.
"Snowden's actions, and the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting that followed," the petition reads, "set in motion the most important debate about government surveillance in decades, and brought about reforms that continue to benefit our security and democracy."
That argument, however, appears inadequate for the Washington Post editorial board, which argued that Snowden's "revelations about the agency's international operations disrupted lawful intelligence-gathering, causing possibly 'tremendous damage' to national security, according to a unanimous, bipartisan report by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. What higher cause did that serve?"
In addition to Greenwald's detailed take-down of the Post's argument, critics of the newspaper were unsparing on social media:
\u201c@RayJoha2 Was that also WAPO's thinking when it published leaked material from Snowden and made money from those stories?\u201d— justRay.eth \ud83c\udff4\u200d\u2620\ufe0f (@justRay.eth \ud83c\udff4\u200d\u2620\ufe0f) 1474205832
\u201cWould love to be a fly on the wall when @PostBaron and @bartongellman discuss this inept attack on their work. https://t.co/6w73wicaWt\u201d— Ben Wizner (@Ben Wizner) 1474206072
\u201c@micahflee WaPo published, @Snowden didn't. He was clear that journalists, not him, qualified to filter docs for public interest vs. nat sec\u201d— Kyle Rankin (@Kyle Rankin) 1474215362
\u201cthe WaPo now wants their source (Snowden) to be jailed? This is so FUBAR. #NeverHillaryOrTrump https://t.co/5qQi0G2nFK\u201d— Iconoclast (@Iconoclast) 1474217592